ABSTRACT
Canine sporting competitions, e.g., agility, obedience, rally obedience, and utility trials, e.g., protection, tracking, search, and messenger, are physically and mentally demanding disciplines. This study aimed to describe the types and frequencies of injuries experienced amongst Swedish sporting and utility trial dogs and to explore associations between discipline, breed, sex, neuter status, age, and injury history. Dog handlers provided information on competition-level dogs (n = 1582) through a cross-sectional survey. The overall proportion of dogs sustaining any injury during their lifetime, whether it was during competition, training, or outside of sport, was 58.7% (n = 928). Muscular, joint, and dermatologic injuries were most commonly reported and the most common injury locations were the thoracic, lumbar and lumbosacral spine, paw, head, shoulder, and stifle. According to multivariate analysis, Border Collie (adjusted OR 1.93), Belgian Malinois (adjusted OR 2.51) and higher age at the time of report (adjusted OR 1.81-9.67) increased the odds of injury history. Our results provide more understanding of injuries in sporting and utility dogs and contribute to injury prevention strategies that potentially enhance canine welfare.
ABSTRACT
Objective: To explore physical activity patterns, including conditioning exercise and sport-specific training, and management routines utilized by handlers of Swedish sporting and working dogs participating in agility, obedience, rally obedience and working trial disciplines. Procedures: Dog handlers provided information on competition-level dogs through an internet-based cross-sectional and descriptive survey on physical activity, sport-specific training and management. Results are reported overall and stratified by participation in specific disciplines. Results: We received 1615 replies to the questionnaire. After data cleaning, 1582 dogs (98%) remained for the analysis. Of these, 430 participated in agility, 790 in obedience, 596 in rally obedience, and 847 dogs had competed in a working trial, i.e., messenger, protection, search or tracking. Number of disciplines performed by each dog varied between one and five. Most common was participation in one (n = 767, 48%) or two (n = 541, 34%) disciplines. Out of the dogs competing in one discipline, 38% (n = 294) were considered to be specialized as they actively trained only that discipline for ≥10 months per year. The vast majority of the dogs (n = 1129, 71%) received more than 1 h of daily physical activity, e.g., walks, and only n = 51 (3%) were never exercised off-leash. Preferred self-selected gait was trot (n = 907, 57%) and gallop (n = 499, 32%). A fifth (n = 319, 20%) never played with other dogs. The majority (n = 1328, 84%) received more than 1 h of vigorous physical conditioning exercise per week. Almost three quarters (n = 1119, 71%) participated in physical conditioning exercise. Two thirds (n = 953, 60%) participated in at least 3 h of sport-specific training per week and only a very small portion (n = 35, 2%) trained their specific discipline less than once per week. Median total work load, i.e., all daily physical activity, vigorous physical conditioning exercise and sport-specific training, was 16.5 h per week. Conclusion and clinical relevance: We observe physical activity at moderate to high durations and moderate to vigorous intensities among Swedish sporting and working trial dogs. Most dogs received physical conditioning exercise, but not all dogs were warmed up before training and competition. Our study provides veterinary professionals and dog trainers with valuable insights on the physical exposures and management routines of sporting and working trial dogs.
ABSTRACT
Dog trials and competitions involve various sport disciplines, e.g., obedience, agility, working dog trials and rally obedience. Dog handlers navigate their dogs through physically and mentally demanding tasks. The purpose of this study was to gain a better understanding of barriers and facilitators to canine health promotion and injury prevention described by dog handlers. METHODS: Qualitative inductive content analysis was applied to systematically organize and interpret narrative data from 654 respondents' answers to open-ended questions in an anonymous online inquiry. RESULTS: Two categories, with seven sub-categories, emerged from the analysis: (1) Challenges in applying the regulations in dog trials and competitions, and (2) Implementation of animal welfare and canine well-being approaches. Respondents described the challenges in applying regulations in dog trials and competitions and lack of scientific research as barriers to their intent to prevent injuries in their dogs. Implementation of animal welfare and canine well-being approaches were described as facilitators. CONCLUSION: The findings imply that the stakeholders continuously need to work on bridging possible gaps between the canine welfare criteria and the scientific and empirical knowledge in canine sports and performance medicine.
ABSTRACT
Mobilization and manipulation techniques are often used in small animal and equine practice; however, questions remain concerning indications, dosing and efficacy. A bibliographic search was performed to identify peer-reviewed publications from 1980 to 2020 that evaluated the clinical effects of musculoskeletal mobilization and manipulation techniques in dogs, cats and horses. The search strategy identified 883 papers for review. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied. The clinical indications, dosages, outcome parameters, and reported efficacy within each publication were recorded and categorized for comparison with scientific quality assessed according to a standardized grading system. Fourteen articles were included in this systematic review of which 13 were equine and one was a canine study. Seven of these were cohort studies and seven were randomized controlled clinical trials. The canine study involved carpal immobilization-remobilization and all equine studies focused on the effects of passive mobilization (n = 5) or manipulation (n = 8) of the axial skeleton. Study quality was low (n = 4), moderate (n = 7), and high (n = 3) and included a wide array of outcome parameters with varying levels of efficacy and duration of therapeutic effects, which prevented further meta-analysis. Therefore, it was difficult to draw firm conclusions despite all studies reporting positive effects. Optimal technique indications and dosages need to be determined to improve the standardization of these treatment options.
